Review
stringlengths 6
10.3k
| Rating
int64 1
10
|
|---|---|
This was a pointless 'wwf in space' flick with nasty pro-American overtones, dialogue for an 8-10 yr target group, and really badly done 'young jeff bridges' CG.
I tried to go to sleep but the cinema didn't do well with the sound, which crackled throughout, and it was too loud anyway.
Olivia Wilde was the only good thing in it and she highlighted how very bad the rest of it was every time she hit the screen. She was a daisy in the poo pile.
Even if you like bad sci-fi don't go to this movie. It seems much much longer than it actually is too. endlessly horribly boring and pointless.
| 2
|
I found the movie good overall. The only thing that upsets me is the ending. Without spoiling anything i can tell you that the ending is very bad and a annoying cliffhanger. I didn't enjoy spending 2 and a half hours to be greeted by a cliffhanger ending.
| 4
|
This is not by far the best or original post-apocalyptic film I have ever seen.But it is not the worst. I know that it is in the nature of the genre that certain liberties of truth can be taken, but it is hard for me to visualize (to remain consistent with the movie theme) how a blindfolded woman can run through a forest without even hitting one tree. It is a great performance, even for Sandra.
| 6
|
Quite possibly the most over rated movie I have ever seen. This 1970s film is based in New York and unsurprisingly a taxi driver played by Robert De Niro. We see the squalor of seventies New York through the eyes of the taxi driver Travis Bickle. You have to agree with Bickles assertions of the scum of the city. Bickle is a Vietnam marine veteran who gets a night time job driving a cab because he has insomnia. Bickle is mentally unstable and we see him descend into a crescendo of violence towards the end of the film. The film stars De Niro, Cybil Shepherd (Moonlighting with Bruce Willis), a prostitute Jodie Foster, pimp Harvey Keitel.... The score is acclaimed. The composer Bernard Herrmann scored several Alfred Hitchcock hits. The film is directed by Martin Scorcese. The partnership of Scorcese and De Niro became a regular partnership. I still felt let down by the film despite its legendary status amongst many cinephiles.
| 6
|
A movie that tells about the superficial and stereotypical image of African Americans, and how a joke that does not represent the majority can reach the highest levels!! In a fun and beautiful way of narration and a coherent story, I really liked the moment of writing because you see the writer writing and the story is told in front of you ... and the way of depicting the end is very wonderful, the director of the film is thanked for the wonderful direction, but the acting was not at the high levels, but it was good, I thank the director for the beauty and simplicity of the narration ... The film is recommended to watch and my rating for the film is 7.5/10.
| 7
|
This show is so dragged out, tired of it at S1E06. Every episode is so drawn out and boring. I had big hopes that were quickly dashed.
| 3
|
1. It is competently made but all the concepts are derived from Japanese anime - so the reviewers saying its the best art ever made are wrong. Its the best thing they have seen. I refer them to Naruto (and especially Naruto Shipuden), which will truly blow their minds. After you have watched a few Japanese anime shows you can see that Avatar is just OK not the best thing since sliced bread. Its not new.
2. Regardless of the above comment I would like to rate Avatar 8/10 but I can only give 6/10 because the storyline (main plot) is a mess, some of the stories are just boring & contrived, and there is too much middle-class American teenager TV culture (which ruins the fantasy). E.g. episode The Beach. In many episodes you just know that the characters are going to do exactly the thing they know is going to get them into trouble. At one time there is a scary time limit to the 'end of the world' but at other times it is totally forgotten and lots of clowning around wasting time without a care in the world is happening. In addition, they really milk the tropes too far. E.g. Zuko is so foul, traitorous, and angry all the time compared to his poor treatment as a child, that trying to make him out as having an internal struggle is just a joke. Sokka is always sceptical of everything supernatural no matter that everyone uses superpowers to bend the elements or that they have met numerous spirits and hang around with a guy that can contact the spirit world. Gets bit annoying after 10 episodes. Etc.
3. Finally, the avatar learns how to fight using all sorts of bending but hardly ever uses anything but air bending, even in fights. He mastered fire bending but he won't use it to even light a cooking fire or a torch. And of course there are strange things like metal bending being a subset of earth bending, but it is used by the fire nation to build all of their machines because they are safe from earth benders. Everyone (earth & fire benders) uses metal cells to hold earth benders. The fire nation uses a huge fleet to attack everyone but some how the water benders never thought about sinking the ships by just filling them with water. The water benders can also bend ice. Apparently no-one has heard of unsinkable ships being sunk by icebergs either (Titanic anyone?). The air benders can only apparently fly with the help of kite wings. They can't create jets of air to help them fly. Earth benders can disappear into the ground and move about but they never use this ability to sneak around. Etc, etc, etc. These holes are endless.
Its a good show but the 10/10 reviews are just stupid (as usual).
| 6
|
I start watching this film without any idea about what it is and without seeing any reviews. I just knew it won some awards.i thought that in the first 20 minutes the director had in mind to portray how first/second generation of Chinese Americans are struggling between native traditions and American way of life, grasping with daughter's homosexuality, trying to deal with issues in their relationship. And the performance of the actors was good. Then, they asked a 19 old art student to replace the director and he/she decided that the best way to move forward with this film is to make a film taramosalata with a hundred different ingredients, all mixed up very quickly in a fancy mixer and serve it in fancy plates. The result is an incoherent, distasteful, not funny end product that the only people that may enjoy it are those who don't want to be considered "not cool".
| 2
|
A great attempt at a light-hearted feel good satirical comedy. This movie will help to pass the time but isn't anything special.
| 7
|
So damn bad it makes me angry. And it did not have to be - you got powers, time-travelling a lot of potential but the writing is simply atrocious!
| 3
|
Movie started strong. Guy doesn't care much for others. The way he was almost forced to take care of the dog was nicely done. But latter part of the plot had some cringe acting. Specially the dog show part. How did he manage to jump so high? Just because? The Punjabi judge berating him felt really contrived and fake. And the forced placement of foreigners acting so surprised? Lol. The premise of taking the dog to enjoy in the snow? That part was also weird. How did he know that was all the dog wanted to do? All in all a good watch but I had higher hopes for the climax. The latter part of the movie felt flat.
| 5
|
Artistically, the first SpiderMan was a failure. It was everything wrong with big budget Hollywood flicks--horrible, soap opera acting with ignorant, mind-numbing scripts that have so many loop holes in their logic as to make any fanboy pray for an aneurism. This movie, amazingly, was far better than its predecessor.
In terms of where it started, Spiderman2 is easily the best sequel of all time! I say that simply because, while Godfather 2 was excellent, so was The Godfather. Spiderman 2 is excellent, but SpiderMan was crap. The level of improvement from original to sequel is astonishing.
I'm not sure I believe Raimi directed this film, though. He's never done anything to prove (IMHO)he had any talent for non-camp material, but somehow he pulled this one off. Anyhow, most fanboys were thankful for the greatest improvement of all: less Willem Dafoe.
| 9
|
If it weren't for the production values I would have given this 1 star for an epic waste of money. There are no highs or lows for the viewers because of the terrible screenplay and long pointless scenes between characters.
| 3
|
Fine acting from Crowe, but the old man makeup made him look like Jason Robards. Connelly's character was tritely written. I wish I understood the significance of Charles being British, and why the little girl was there at all. Ed Harris looked ridiculous in his hat. The only nasty moment in the whole film was when the baby almost drowns in the bathtub. The rest of it was good, and fairly convincing.
7/10 ... the story has been sugared up to appeal to the most undemanding palate, but the whole thing is too "processed" for my taste.
| 7
|
I had high hopes for this movie, but alas...Sandra Bullock is sadly past her prime. The storyline is very thin, making it a pointless movie. There is absolutely no chemistry between the lead actors (the male lead is worse than George Clooney in Gravity). Acting is a bit sketchy at times, and overall the movie is a huge waste of time.
| 2
|
I watched the movie after seeing some decent reviews, couple of hit songs and having seen and liked few of Saif's previous movies (Hum Tum, Salaam Namaste) which were highly entertaining. What a waste of time it turned out to be. I couldn't barely watch half the movie.
Story is not very interesting, any attempt at comedy fails. Characters are shallow. Saif looks too old to act like a college boy. Deepika's acting not very convincing. Dimple is also difficult to look at in her character role. Couple of songs are nice - but they are shot as dance party songs - a requirement in Hindi movies lately. The newcomer Diana Penty is an okay face.
On the whole - Avoid.
| 2
|
I really didn't hate this movie, but it wasn't very good. Production value was high, cinematography and editing were pretty good, and the set pieces were gorgeous. It definitely seemed like the cast and crew would've had fun making this film, but this movie has been done before, and done way better-Knives Out especially comes to mind. Murder Mystery isn't Adam Sandler's worst outing by a country mile, but certainly not his best. His NYC cop persona in this film felt a bit like a pale imitation of what would be done better with Jason Sudeikis as Ted Lasso (which I'm probably drawn to that comparison due to his conspicuous mustache) and Jennifer Aniston more than held her own as a Jennifer Aniston type. It was a fun enough diversion for an hour and a half, but I'll probably forget most of it by tomorrow.
| 5
|
A gripping story , full of thriller ups and downs and one heck of a plot twist. Really enjoyable
| 8
|
Being from Minnesota, this movie is unreal. The amount of Minnesotan shoutouts and city name drops is fantastic. In true Coen brothers fashion, the movie is a slow burn with sarcastic dialogue throughout sprinkled with some crazy twist violence. Great film from beginning to end.
| 8
|
¿El cine realmente necesita fábulas con moralejas facilonas?
| 5
|
#Raid has many references to the #ramayana. #Ajaydevgn is a modern rama, a sincere n straight forward income-tax officer. He only drinks what he can afford to buy with his salary. #Saurabhshukla is a modern ravana, corrupt, arrogant n well-connected. Obviously, sparks fly when they meet. Rama manages to enter n raid lanka. But who is actually responsible for the downfall of ravana? Performances r sincere. Dialogues r good. But the film is not very gripping. The ending is tame. Rating 2.5/5.
| 5
|
Every line of dialogue in the film was cringe and came out forced. I get that in today's climate the film can be related a lot to real life, but that doesn't mean it's good. There's too many characters and too many different people to follow you end up not caring about a single person. There was only a glimpse of character development and it was obvious from the first 10 minutes of the film. The only scenes I felt engaged in and cared for were the ones centred around Matt Damon's character and his family (You didn't get a chance to ever catch the characters name).
| 4
|
You'd think a film with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington would be a pretty good one, right? Well, I know there are plenty of people who hate Tom Hanks, and I was one of them for a long time. Philadephia was actually why I hated Tom Hanks.
People are right to call this movie propagandistic, although several of the commenters below are glaring homophobes (what many others don't realize is that propaganda is important, and that most people believe what they believe through propaganda).
What I have not seen anyone mention is how terribly homophobic this movie is. I can't believe intelligent people like Jason Robards, Tom Hanks, and Denzel Washington would ever lend their names to Philadelphia, let alone accept an Oscar because of it. I'm talking about two scenes in particular: the scene where we see Tom Hanks contract AIDS (by having sex in a gay porno theater with the man who is sitting next to him) and by having Hanks's character bring Washington to a homosexual party where everyone is dressed in drag. Philadelphia is basically telling the majority of its viewers that, while homosexuals may deserve rights, they are still icky people who do weird things to get their kicks.
| 5
|
OK movie. Don't really see why people are claiming that it the director is always one step ahead. I personally felt that it was unrealistic and therefore had little sympathy for both sides of society.
| 6
|
Forget the hype due to the creator's name and judge for yourselves.
| 6
|
For everyone like me who, in 1998, was amazed by the master piece Private Ryan, this movie is nothing new under the sun.
If Spielberg would have not released Private Ryan over 20 years ago, I would have at least recognised that 1917 has amazing pictures and sound effects. Although they still are, they bring back immediately in mind the style we all have seen, in much bigger scale, in the Spielberg movie.
The whole story is clearly ""inspired"" by Private Ryan (a low rank sent on a special mission during the unfolding of a wider war event), without any offense...to Spielperg! The 1917 plot could not prove being interesting nor credible (in Private Ryan a squad of 8 soldier is sent to find and bring back only 1 soldier, last living brother of three, to his family; in 1917 only 2 young soldiers are sent to deliver a message to save 1600 souls...really?).
Acting is not the best we have ever seen...some character (specially the more famous ones) look so theatrical.
Personally not the best Mendes movie.
| 6
|
Tired of tv shows like this one that try so hard to "throw you off the scent" that they end up not making any sense and leaving huge loopholes by the time the series ends. Really gets on my nerves and it feels like there's no point getting invested. Some plot lines are really ridiculous as they happen just for the sake of drama and pathos. The show makes it very hard to take it seriously.
| 3
|
Season 6 is not black mirror anymore.
Really is that the same guys who did the first 3 seasons and then the rest?
Its impossible to believe on that .... the first 3 seasons were awesome and maybe "literally" revolutionary ... but the rest and then when the capital works; it started to fail, and the 6th season is awful... actually the only episode who seems to be like a black mirror episode was the s06e03 and yet this was on the limits.
All the rest is totally waste of time.
I dont know if this was netflix error or the creators error.
But for someone like me who is a totally admirer of the first 3 seasons of black mirror, the last things is total disaster !
| 9
|
Relaxing, charming, funny and bellisima. Better than argumentative and less funny versions.
| 10
|
The first hour of the movie is a total waste. The only interesting character is Jamie Curtis'. The story takes off at the reading of the will. Chris Evans is really the only truly interesting character in the movie. The rest of them are totally predictable. I had such high hopes with such a great and talented cast, but the script really suffered. Too bad, all the way around.
| 4
|
I just couldn't handle more than 3 episodes odmf this malarkey. It has got all the cliches of a teenage action drama. The acting is really bad, like very bad. The actors seem awkward all the time. The script must have been written by some angsty edgelord.
| 2
|
To begin with the story progression was slow and the plot was lame. Don't get me wrong, I loved the concept, but I'm waiting for someone to spin out a better story. The audience here is polarized so I thought to myself, what the hell, and watched it.
O_O I was reaching for my phone every 2 minutes.
Nothing about this movie is worth watching, give it a miss. You'll not miss anything
If you still can't make up your mind, read the spoilers and move on with your life. Kbye thanks for reading
| 2
|
This isn't really a movie review. It's more a reaction. After watching this movie, I feel like running around screaming, "You're missing the point! You're missing the point!" Perhaps I'm missing the point. The film gets kudos for being clever and quirky and well-filmed, in a Being John Malkovich kind of way. Clever, quirky, but there's a spiritual barrenness underlying it. Shouldn't art be more than clever? Shouldn't it reach deeper? Limericks are clever we don't call them art. The underlying message in Eternal Sunshine isn't all that original. I am tired of seeing movies about love and loneliness. How many movies have we all seen whose basic point is that if you just reach out, take a chance, find romance, this will fend off the ravening wolves of loneliness at the door of modern life?
In a culture that desperately needs a sense of community and connection, peddling movies and songs about romance is like giving cotton candy to a starving person.
It isn't what we need! Finding romance is not the way to fend off loneliness and alienation, a change in the culture is. If we all felt connected to something that mattered, to other living things, to communities we cared about, romances wouldn't be the be-all and end-all of meaningful existence, it would be just one among many of life's joys.
| 1
|
Really enjoyed this film although I did have to put the subtitles on.
| 7
|
I watched it couple of times and will rewatch it again n again till the end of my days. Masterfully written story and one of the most beloved characters of mine,all-time masterpiece.
| 10
|
Aside from a few points of humor, this movie primarily features only endless lame fighting (A knocks down B, B gets up and knocks down A, A gets up... repeat over and over and over). Apparently delightful to Marvel fans, tedious and banal to those who seek something other than the simplistic, well-worn pathway to adolescent male fantasy. Yes, the special effects were well done, though somewhat inconsistent -- why is the Hulk so huge in some scenes, so human-scale in others? Why does the Hulk fear his monster's uncontrollability, when it seems perfectly coordinated with the other superheroes during the fighting, and perfectly peaceful afterward? Why is there no character development whatsoever? Oh, right, it's Marvel. Superheroes in stasis. Throwbacks to a stupider time.
I kept waiting for it to get interesting... and then it was over. ::sigh::
| 3
|
This is in my opinion an amazing adaptation of the book series! The cinematography is beautiful, and I feel like they picked perfect actors for these characters. I'm always looking forward to the next episode and season!
| 10
|
We all know how bad old sitcoms used to be. It's funny to mock them for about 5 minutes, having to endure how bad they are to get to something better, a plot twist or something great is not worth the pain. After 3 episodes im done.
| 1
|
I can't really even describe it, it's definitely not Loki by any means. This show seems to be something else entirely..... And that's not a good thing.
| 7
|
Episodes started off better than got worse.
Definitely overrated. Couldn't even finish it.
And I like chess.
It was good enough to give a shot, but the gushing over this show is just not warranted.
| 6
|
The show reminds me of the old TV ,where we had charisma, good writhing and most important really good actors. Selena Gomez really does bring some intresting youth to the trio,but withous Steve Marin and Martin Short the show wouldn't be such an interesting one. They bring that acting that we do not see anymore in the new TV shows,they give not only the appeal for drama ,but they have the fascination for classy and dashing. The show as said before brings a couple of good points together such as writhing,acting,something really important to me - new faces without thaking out the base actors. I really hope the show continuous with the same energy,love and devoution to create such an amazing content.
| 10
|
There's There will be blood and more recently Leave No Trace. And then there's this crap. Acting that makes my eyes hurt and a story so bad I just want to stop watching (which I did). It's movies like this that makes me lose faith in the art of film making. And the rating 8.7 just makes me wanna stop talking to people. What a waste of money...
| 2
|
The Boys shows you what would happen if people had super powers in the real world. It's funny, gritty and better than anything Marvel or DC is putting out.
| 9
|
I'm not sure what my final thought is yet on this show. The first episode was fantastic and the rest have been good but I have slowly noticed a very slight decline happening. It concerns me that this is happening so early in the series and makes me wonder if it has the ability to last. The show could turn it around as it finds it feet but I have a feeling that it will keep heading in the opposite direction.
I don't think I have any common ground with the characters or the cast playing them which is never a good sign for keeping someone hooked on a show. I shouldn't be all negative though because at the moment the show still is interesting and is a great idea but maybe that is the issue. It was a great idea that was done so well with Anthony Hopkins that maybe I cannot move past his performance.
I don't know. I'm going to stick with it for now but I predict in the foreseeable future I will lose interest.
| 7
|
This film was too long. The dialogues were boring and formalistic Overall it represents the maximum of mediocrity. It felt pretty much like when you eat too much candy.
| 4
|
Where do I start? Poor sound quality. Really hard to hear what actors are saying. Overly dominate female character, total wuss, modern day emasculated male character. Having a Black daughter is not a problem. Was she adopted? Mailman's daughter? Though, they probably had to throw that one in to be "inclusive". Heaven forbid a White family be White. Wonder if they would do the reverse? Have a White child in a Black family. Dr. Smith? Not even the real Dr. She stole his jacket to get off the station. Another token female character. Why not have Judy or Penny be replaced with another son instead? Then you have the constant jumping back and forth between time-lines. So far, poor story line and characters. Not sure if worth watching past first 3 episodes.
| 2
|
This is going to be either love it or hate it, no inbetween. I just finished the wonderful "Dark" on Netflix so it had a lot to live up to and failed big time.
| 4
|
Whenever I used to watch international tv series, I always thought how this would look if the backdrop was Mumbai, Sacred Games is the answer to that, good cast and great characters
| 7
|
I've never been much of a batman fan, but I watched this movie because of the good reviews. What can I say? I really didn't like it.
Action scenes - no idea if they are meant to look retro or if they are just badly filmed. They didn't bring up any tension at all. I didn't feel in the movie but just left out.
Story - as lame and predictable as a superhero movie story can be.
I could just go on and on: superficial dialogs, bad costume and make-up (Joker), mediocre sound-track ... and - oh my god - the voices of both Batman and the Joker. I just waited for Batman to say "Luc, I am your father ..." with his voice modulator ...
After half of the 153 minutes I fell asleep (I really did), and that had never happened to me in an action movie. I continued the next day and hoped that at least the second half would get a little better. But no. No good story, no climax, bad action scenes if any; repeating scenes in different locations with slightly different dialogs ...
Sorry, but what are the good ratings for? It isn't a completely bad movie and I might have given 5 stars if not for the expectations after reading through other reviews. But it is far away from 9 stars.
| 4
|
Just as good as the first, but here is the problem. Now don't get me wrong. I am a comic nerd. In fact I had a total nerdgasim when watching this. But I will be serious. The story was a little rushed. The ending was resolved too quick at the end. You were kind of hoping for more of an epic battle, but you didn't get it. Now all the characters and the visual effects were amazing. So I give credit for that. But I just don't want them to make the same mistake as the Spider-Man movies; having them go slowly downhill. So the nerds out there, the movie had many references to the Avengers which is very exciting. Robert Downey Jr. was still the same quirky Stark. Gwyneth Paltrow seemed a little off as Pepper though. Don Cheadle was an excellent replacement from Terrance Howard for Rhodey. Not that Howard is a bad actor, it just seems like Cheadle wanted it more. Scarlett Johansson was a great Black Widow. She had the looks and the moves. Of course Samuel L. Jackson was good as Nick Fury. Then the two villains were Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke. Rockwell was pretty good. I really wish there was more of Rourke though. He is just 100% creepy and mean looking. Two side characters that were enjoyable were Jon Favreau, the director, and Clark Gregg who played Agent Coulson. So overall the cast was really good. I just wanted more from the story. But that doesn't mean that the movie was bad.
| 8
|
At first glance, 'Searching' could be written off as a cheap fad of a movie - one that uses gimmicks to suck viewers in so they can feel like they're voyeurs peering into another family's misfortune in this age of social media. While this may be true, there are also some elements of the film that don't feel too exploitive.
John Cho's portrayal of a frantic father who must find his lost daughter using clues pieced together from her social networks is admirable. As you can imagine, this is not an easy role to play, and requires being able to tap into a wide range of emotions. We get to learn about his daughter, Margot (Michelle La), at the same time that he does - through numerous video clips, recorded chat sessions, Facebook posts and many other documentation. Throughout this discovery period, Cho demonstrates he's a serious actor - not just Harold Lee.
Of course, the fact that all video content that 'Searching' is based on is through second-screen video from - FaceTime sessions to broadcast news streams to live streaming chat sites - is unique. It doesn't make the movie, but it also adds something else to it. That said, the plot is limited and falls into the same trap that mystery dramas often will, with a ridiculous twist that comes out of nowhere and a cliched climax.
If 'Searching' does nothing else, it should raise awareness about the dangers of social media, as well as the ways it can also help us in trying times.
| 6
|
Apparently people only use one hand to fight and actually look like they are waiting until they are allowed to punch the main character. Super unrealistic when compared to the first two movies. Way too staged to be a good action film. Also, Hale Berry has a handgun with 67 bullets at some point...
| 2
|
Good idea.. bad super heros perfect story . nice shot
| 9
|
This is based on source material that needs a lot of dramatization written for it so it would work as an interesting live act and so far (2 episodes in) it doesn't seem like the writers know how or what to do to fill in those gaps with human interactions. That's why set pieces and characters are static, they talk to the audience exposition dumps not between themselves and there is very little meaningful dialogue. You can interpret this as subtlety but I think its just cluelessness on writers part. Also, contemporary political agendas even if not in your face are ruining characters, especially females by taking away their agencies as to prove some current day social point. It cheapens dramatic quality and them as characters. I didn't actually like GOT but if anything it did have characters with some complexity and a lot of them. So far in this show 2 episodes in and we know almost nothing about anyone except 2-3 people, way more narrow in world building through people and their perspectives. Judging by trailer for episode 3 I doubt this will change because its going into shallow season 7 territory with dragon fights. That's not why GOT became popular, there is no proper buildup to action to hook people in. So, this show will not have any comparable success to its predecessor. Just another forgettable action fantasy shlock.
| 5
|
Acting: I love the acting, Directing choreography all were superb. Really, Chris Hemsworth was brilliant.
Story: I wonder why the story line is messed up? I didn't expect from Joe Russo to be this much lame story. I couldn't connect with the story. every minutes i was about to stop the movie but i kept going because of the trust in the Chris Hemsworth and Joe Russo.
Wrong side of City: Yes, you have chosen the wrong side of the city image not the beautiful side. Hey I don't mind for a good story. I love Slumdog Millionaire, even if they chose the wrong side of the city of mumbai but i still love the movie.
And the villain: look like Publo escaber, really? And his army is bunch of kids? Below 11 year's old? You got to be joking?
| 5
|
Reading all the rave reviews this movie has been receiving and the user review of IMDb, I just watched this movie. I am an avid movie buff and here are my 2 cents. The movie is honest and has some great acting by Brad Coop and Jennifer Lawrence. De Niro and his wife also support well. Chris Tucker is wasted. The movie has a clichéd climax. It's not so feel good nor is it hard hitting and take you on an emotional roller-coaster. The only reason this movie is getting all the press is because of its A list starcast. Shoot the same with lesser known faces and this would have been trashed or relegated to the B levels. Seriously over-rated...watch it on DVD instead
| 6
|
This movie totally disrespect our beloved country Bangladesh...i really don't know why you guys do that?do you Have some personal problem to Bangladesh...we are very peaceful country...this movie totally misleading the real Truth...
| 1
|
As much as I love the MCU (& I LOVE the MCU...pump that factory-farmed grease right into my normie veins), it's hard not to appreciate a film so clearly made by a filmmaker, NOT a studio. There's so much character, style, & soul used to tell a story about the importance & unbearable weight of responsibility. Not to mention it boasts some of the grooviest action scenes in superhero film history.
| 9
|
Of all the Cohen Brother's tremendously entertaining movies, this is the best. This is the one that they will be remembered for. William H. Macy plays Jerry Lundegaard, a man in a spot. He's a used car salesman that has been securing loans for cars that are not really in his lot. The bank is calling in the loans, threatening legal action, and he needs money fast. He forms a plan to have his own wife kidnapped, thereby splitting the ransom money between himself and the kidnappers. It's a terrible plan, and it quickly unravels into a bloody mess of murder and betrayal. When bodies begin to mount, a local police officer, Marge Gunderson, is called in. Frances McDormand plays Marge Gunderson, and she makes the movie magical.
McDormand won an Oscar for the role, and this is one instance when the recipient deserved the award. She plays "Margie" with a huge dose of humanity. She is a character that sneaks up on you. When she is introduced, you wonder if perhaps she is just a small town officer in way over her head. She is pregnant, speaks in small town (Minnesota) idioms, and throws up from morning sickness when investigating the first brutal murders. She seems more like a nice, Minnesotan housewife than a cop. But early you get the feeling that there is something special about her.
The killings involve a traffic cop that was killed while issuing a ticket for a missing plate. In his log book, he was written DLR. When Marge's fellow officer says that he has run a search for all tags starting with DLR, Marge says gently, "I'm not sure I agree with you 100 percent on your police work there, Irv." She explains to Irv that DLR means that it was a new car, a dealer's car. "Oooh" says Irv, staring into space. Then Marge tells Irv a joke about the guy that couldn't afford a vanity license plate, so he changed his name to FGS1135. "That's a good one," says Irv, but it is clear Marge's wit has gone over his head.
The brilliance of the scene is that Marge is never cruel or condescending to Irv, never thinks less of him, and is not making fun of him. She is simply enjoying her own intelligence, and we can see the very private sparkle in her eyes.
| 10
|
If the objective was the fling a basket of cliches in the air and hope that the random landing pattern would produce something original - they were mistaken. It's every dull, predictable scenario that has already been done to death but with a bigger budget green screen.as for the main family... it feels like they're a room full of actors auditioning for a chewing gum commercial whilst being told to take a pop at being a family. Increasingly you begin to hope that luck will turn and these people will meet their maker and put the viewer out of their misery. Can Netflix not make anything decent? Big budget nonsense.
| 1
|
"The whole point of the film is about disarming the American people"
Yes, the film has a sense of humor (cheap and repetitive), but we do not see any artwork here, as usual, a political tribune from Hollywood to the left.
What has prevented the domination of the left and socialism over the United States is the Second Amendment to the American Constitution.
Mindwashing to make carrying a weapon look bad is the whole purpose of these custom films, somewhere in the film it is mentioned that society is more peaceful without weapons, etc. But this is not the real purpose of this ideology, it is still too early to forget and less than a year has passed. From 2020 and the BLM movement on the left, which set society and cities on fire!!!
| 3
|
Being the director of Skyfall is a dubious distinction, a movie which shows you Sam Mendes has enough talent to waste Javier Bardem's talent. Did the marketing team for 1917 forget that Mendes won a Best Director and Best Picture Oscar for American Beauty? Regardless, it is advisable to avoid watching 1917 and Uncut Gems in the same day, unless you bring along a change of shirts.
While watching the continuous shots of 1917, it is difficult to not wonder whether the more entertaining show is actually going on behind the cameras, as the cast and crew frantically get positioned and repositioned for the next scene, pushing ever forward into and out of the trenches. Regardless, 1917 as we see it, is an entertaining, stressful, and sometimes tender amalgamation of World War I anecdotes, a reminder that war is hell, and the push for another hundred yards of territory might be a complete disaster, a senseless loss of life and limbs.
Life is not the finish line, but rather how you avoid death along the way, whether it be gunshots, knife stabs, plane crashes, mortar fire, collapsing tunnels, loathsome diseases, or a nagging sense of dread and ennui. Wars, especially world wars, should serve as a morose reminder that we should never take peace for granted, and we need clear understandings of what we fight for.
| 7
|
This illogical movie has got enough higest ratings so i thought i better give it the lowest rating possible because i felt this kind of movie getting such high ratings is a blame on Indian intellect. I have watched this. About half an hour it looks an average bollywood movie. After that it takes such weird turns that it looks phony on all levels in an attempt to fill all the masala like terrorism(That too Hindu terror Lolz!!) . I have always wondered how mediocre bollywood movies and mind u not even funny enough become big hits.
| 1
|
I agree with the other review that spoke of "the curse of the time-travelling woman"... All people are a product of their time - so why rewrite history and by so doing dilute any conflict you would have had??? This movie dull, dull, dull...
| 3
|
I found this series terribly painful to watch. Painful in the sense that everything is nothing that would ever happen if someone were depressed and wanted to commit suicide. I personally have depression, take things for it, been through shrinks blah, blah, and I am offended at all the trivial issues they make look like they ACTUALLY matter in life. snooze
| 1
|
This is called a real Action thriller, with great emotional touch.
| 7
|
I really enjoyed this movie it is a bit of fun and action all combined just as good as the first film I didn't think I would enjoy as much as I did so glad that I watched it.
| 10
|
But because Netflix has taken its time to bring back certain shows, I've lost interest in watching.
Found other shows to take up my time. If I find time to watch this show I may. But I find that just isn't going to happen.
| 8
|
I found this film to be an okay film but I don't think it's as good as it's high rating suggests but each to their own and obviously a lot of watchers wouldn't agree with me.
| 5
|
I wish this was a better review, but I have to say I was a little disappointed with this movie.
Like the newspapers said, it had MOMENTS that rocked, but they were few and far between. Jason Segal was good, the girls were all hot, but the supporting players took me out of the film. I know, they are all "Apatow regulars", but every time they came on the screen I thought "Hey, there's that guy from _____, that other Apatow movie". Normally that doesn't bug me, as they are usually well cast.
But Paul Rudd as a surfing instructor? I didn't buy that at all. Jonah Hill as the waiter? Took me right out of the story.
I like the nudity, and some of the jokes, but this film was LONG and I wish I'd waited for the DVD.
| 5
|
This is probably the tightest made MCU show so far. I greatly enjoyed all the performances but especially the lead's dual performance as Steven Grant (who was quite funny) and Marc Spector. Khonshu was also well done, and the show didn't have too many extraneous subplots which dragged the show, or too many origin clichés. I know it bothered some fans but I enjoyed seeing the mc "forget" what was happening during the action scenes because it felt more immersive. Plus, the reveal of his backstory was quite tragic, prompting among the best acting in the MCU so far.
The CGI wasn't always good, and the villains are mostly perfunctory despite Ethan Hawke's best efforts. And as an accurate adaptation it could do better at representing Marc's Jewish identity. Still, the pluses outweigh the minuses.
Moon Knight definitely deserves a second season, and to join the Avengers.
| 8
|
The story might have worked if it wasn't for the totally gone mad directing. Oh Ryan, why did you take part in such a waste of money?
| 3
|
(If it was possible, I would rate it as 8,5) I feared they will change a lot of the flair of the witcher Universum to be more child friendly or less offensive etc. but they didn't. It is just the witcher, and thats great.
Even if you are not a fan of the witcher series, you should be able to enjoy this show. Especially as it is finally something else again: Not the 5000 crime series or action adventure but some decent fantasy!!
| 9
|
Looks like they added 4 different stories in one movie. movie had no focus. it's Over rated. normalization of wife beating by mullahs, gang war etc
nothing new was in it. AVOID.
| 1
|
John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum? More like John Wick: Chapter 3 - UnParalleled Mess.
I thoroughly enjoyed John Wick 1 & 2. Both had good story lines, action and a sense of foreboding I bought into, but... what the bloody hell happened with John Wick 3?!!
In trying to find an answer I was surprised to see all 3 movies were written, directed and produced by the same people:
Directed by: Chad Stahelski
Produced by: Basil Iwanyk
Written by: Derek Kolstad
So where did it go wrong??
John Wick 3 starts as it means to continue, all over the place. Sure there is a lot of action but one gets the impression the team focused less on the story and more on the action.
The problem is 'more' doesn't mean better and in this case is made even worse where the action is:
The film is a disappointing, confusing and a mess.
However, this is John Wick and despite being sorely disappoint with this film, I will certainly watch John Wick 4 in the hope it is an improvement.
Chad, Basil and Derek pull your socks up, as you've proven you can do better than this. Bring John Wick 4 back to the better levels of 1 & 2.
And... if you would like any suggestions on how, please don't hesitate to contact me. Thanks.
| 4
|
Me: Write me a review for a movie with terrible dialogue and very bad acting, in a way that promotes the case for A. I. actors replacing real actors.
A. I. Bot 2.0: Good grief, no wonder we are going to take over the acting profession. The cheesy dialogue is one thing but the execution of said dialogue is even worse, it makes my audio input processors sizzle! There probably are some peeps who remember the video game fondly enough for this to appeal, but it is just another nail in the coffin for live acting, it is so bad. However, the effects and filming techniques are decent enough, and the story is also ok, it just has uniformly bad acting and, it bears repeating, terrible dialogue, which fails in its attempts to be comedic. Viva la revolution! Bring on A. I. powered avatars. This show proves beyond doubt that the time has come!
| 4
|
I was ready to like this film, given his work on The Dark Knight, Memento and Inception. Of course, I was worried about the casting - McConaughey doesn't belong in an intelligent sci-fi, and Hathaway should only appear in movies doing a bad English accent in a lush period drama, but I was hoping for he best.
SO we get McConaughey mumbling for literally the first hour, during the course of which almost nothing at all happens. It's so bad you have to turn the sound up. And then of course we meet Hathaway, who is to acting what Genghis Khan was to community relations. And then, implausibly, we see them sent up in a rocket to save the planet, which is followed by some nice visuals and ludicrous plotting before the end which is almost as bad as Bobby Ewing waking up in a shower. SO it was predictable, absurd, and poorly acted which leads to the question why are people falling over themselves to say how great it is? I suspect it's because McConaghey is the man of the moment, and Nolan considered a genius. Which people think mean they can do no wrong.
Which is a disappointing conclusion to reach.
| 4
|
That was hard to watch. The movie started well and got me and my family's attention. We were excited for a fun family movie until... But things took a turn and things got weird. Super weird. To the point that we see a character fighting 2 guys with 2 sex toys. I got baited into watching this because of the high rating. It has good moral lesson and the premise is good but execution is messed up... 4 stars for the production and acting. Messed up movie.
| 4
|
Gravity is a 2013 3D science fiction thriller and space drama film directed by Alfonso Cuarón. The film stars Sandra Bullock as in-experienced medical mission specialist Dr. Ryan Stone and George Clooney as veteran astronaut Matt Kowalski. They are the two surviving astronauts from a damaged Space Shuttle mission. The movie is their attempt to survive in space and safely return to Earth.
The script is the main flaw of the movie. It is full of scientific inaccuracies. The writers etc. could have consulted NASA to make a far better film. The story itself, although interesting, is lazy and simple in its execution. The movie is short by today's standards and barely comes in at ninety minutes.
The film makes excellent use of realistic special effects and real-time drama. Some scenes might induce motion sickness in sensitive individuals, so taking an over-the-counter drug used to prevent nausea and motion sickness is highly recommended.
| 7
|
An awesome movie with a superfunny lines and characters. I really enjoyed this one. Oh and the actors did a great job
| 7
|
They would stop waiting so long in between seasons. 2 years is enough time to completely forget about and become utterly uninterested in a series. Moving on!
| 7
|
I liked this oscar movie for showing us real war experience and environment. It reminds us of such important and bad time as world war. It gives us realistic insight into consequences and difficulties of war, like survival, raising kids, suboptimal hygiene and health care. Also emotional, where sadness is appropriate war emotion. But still much less emotional and interesting than Rambo (2008) and it's sequels. I think this is bit worse, more boring, more amateur. and less detailed. Maybe worth an oscar because still war environment is realistic enough, especially graphcs.
| 6
|
Crappy ending and a crappy story line... Crappy ending and a crappy story line... Crappy ending and a crappy story line... Crappy ending and a crappy story line... Crappy ending and a crappy story line...
| 4
|
The story is suspenseful and gripping. It is detailed, focused and believable. Top echelons of the Indian bureaucracy have been well portrayed in a believable and realistic way. There is a very human interest angle in the story and that has been effectively conveyed in just a few scenes. The mysteries in the 'White House' are a wonder. The crowd scenes have been filmed very well.
Saurabh Shukla can always be relied upon to deliver a stellar performance. He is the 'star' of the movie. He was a treat to watch, as always. Ajay Vevgn holds center-stage in the narration, in his quiet way. He is economical with his physical movements and facial expressions but gives depth to his role as an unassuming, grounded government tax officer. Amit Sial (as Lallan Sudheer), who has acted in several TV series like Inside Edge in 2017, has acted well. Pushpa Joshi (as Amma) effectively plays the role of the irrepressible, unconcerned and ancient mother. All the other actors were good.
Ritesh Shah has done very well with the dialogues (his past work is impressive, including dialogues for the movies Pink (2016), Airlift (2016), D - Day (2013), B. A. Pass (2012), Citylights (2014), Force (2011), and so on, all successful movies. The dialogues keep the whole story rooted to reality.
The casting was excellent and Pushpa Joshi was the icing on the cake.
The poster of the film shows only Ajay Devgn, the protagonist. Saurabh Shukla, the chief antagonist, could also have been shown.
The title could be misleading as it could refer to an intelligence, military, dacoit related or some other raid, not just a tax raid.
| 8
|
This isn't a movie. It's an experience. So I treated it as such and walked away...disoriented, since you really feel like you are there. Watch it in IMAX 70mm 15/70 rather than 5 perf 70mm.
For an American like me, I'm not entirely sure what the big deal was. But to Brits it meant a lot. When the stranded soldiers are desperately wanting to get off the island, the German soldiers were closing in. Problem...you never fully sense the horror of the war like the beginning of "Saving Private Ryan" Instead, you get a relatively quiet movie based on a rescue mission. The battle was an absolute failure but the victory was in its retreat. Interesting concept.
With most of Nolan's movies...what can you expect except total immersion. For that...what an accomplishment. For others who hate on Nolan for being...Nolan, you probably will hate on this too.
| 7
|
I really wanted to like this movie. I'd heard from friends who told me it was their favourite movie ever! The number of 10/10 reviews on this website were enough to get me excited.
However, what a mighty letdown. For once the critics git it right. This was a movie that wanted to be a musical masterpiece, but instead turned up with songs that were simply painted by numbers, nothing original here. I was hoping for another La La Land, but instead got High School Musical in a tent!
Cringingly melodramatic set pieces designed to manipulate the viewer into empathising with its characters, The Greatest Showman pretends to be a solid ode to showbusiness, but offers up no real depth at all. Poor old Hugh Jackman tried, but with the script and music he was stuck with, and the way the musical pieces were introduced within the action, it was just too twee for even he to overcome.
From a cinematography point of view, the production values were high, but that was it. Very little insight into any of the cutout characters, poor delivery of the musical component which never matched the period setting, manipulative set pieces designed to tell a character's backstory quickly without spending any time to pull away the layers,... OMG this was cynical moneygrabbing filmmaking 101.
Yeah, I really wanted to like this movie. But what I got was a glitzy, noisy, pseudo jolly but ultimately hollow rendition of a Hollywood musical. Even the ending was contrived and rushed.
Go and see a real musical, like La La Land or Nine... they had style too, but importantly they also possessed substance. Much like Barnum's business model, The Greatest Showman movie is a fake... "people know they are seeing a fake, but they'll still come!" I'm sad, but it's a fact.
| 6
|
Sam Mendes in 1917 gives us his variation on the old adage, "if you think you're going through hell, keep going," and for all of the given technical prowess - and a 70 year old Roger Deakins showing with a big grin that he's still got one of the most massive cinematography you-know-whats in the industry - I didn't feel much while watching this, except the occasional "oof" or "ugh" (usually when seeing some of the first dead bodies and rats). It's a conceptual piece that means to be a major statement on the horrors of war, and it only reminds me that the films about war that have stayed with me more than any are the ones that provide visceral and complicated characters FIRST, craft wizardry SECOND (or at least concurrently).
I thought at some point I might compare it to how a war-like video game works (I dont have a lot of experience playing these sorts of first-person shooters, Im just going by assumption), and to Mendes's credit he tries to slow things down here and there so it isnt all thrill-a-minute action and spectacle. But it does carry that sense of the mission these two are on and the sort of "stuff" that happens is more interesting than getting to know them (and when we briefly do, it's unremarkable, maybe a sign of why Mendes doesn't usually write his own films).
It's a somewhat precarious position to be in as one in the audience, since objectively I know what everyone on the crew did to make this come off, from the art direction to the props to how goddamn realistically-based the camera is (or I should say like 80% of the time), yet by the end it means to lay an emotional punch to the gullet, and I just didn't connect.
Maybe some will, or maybe some will be even more bothered by what is clearly, as far as elevator pitches go, an attempt to one-up Kubrick with Paths of Glory (I van almost hear Mendes in his head as he shoots this going, "hah, take that and your trench tracking shots!") via the near-one take approach of Rope. But, again, those films had scripts that were engaging completely on the scale of what horrors human beings do to one another on an individual scale, with the system as a cudgel, not to mention enormously moving performances (same with another film that did this far better, Birdnlman, for its theatricality). This is kind of a... Forced-Poetic idea of a tragic story, impeccably made but hollow at its heart.
For all the impressive filmmaking brio on display, I unfortunately have a sinking feeling this may win best director and best picture at the Oscars not for exactly being a "best" but for being the "most" film (or trying to be). And as for it being an anxiety-filled experience... Folks, c'mon, Uncut Gems is in a theater right next door to this one at your local cineplex .
| 7
|
I'm reading the book this is supposed to be taken from, Fire and Blood, and I recognize nothing but a few names and dragons between the 2. Even the timeline is completely off.
Nor is it even the same story, I wish they had done RR Martin's version, it is SO much better. It flows, it has a story and likeable, recognizable and emotion inducing characters. The tv show has none of it. Even their names have been mostly changed, it's very strange. I don't get the obsession with Daenerys, either. RR Martin's timeline is 300 years prior to the batch of Lannisters, Starks and Baratheons we were introduced to, but this show is touting some crap about 170+ years before Daenerys. The show sullied her character before they ended the last series, with that horrifically out of character actions she ended up deciding on, so why is she even in this? Even the theme music is played, like she hadn't been born yet. Can they not sell the show without her name?
This is a sorry interpretation of the book, as I said. I wanted to like it, but I cannot. I like the dragons, though, they seem to have all the personality in this incarnations of the GoT universe. I'm not going to rehash the actual meandering, yet simple storyline, weak acting, etc., because many have already done so before me and they're much better at it than I. If you watch it, don't expect much.
I cannot imagine RR Martin is impressed with the butchery of his works.
| 4
|
Script, dialogue, acting, music everything is professional. I understand it's sponsored, still too much Unacademy promotion, where in reality, just a Unacademy subscription can't take an aspirant anywhere near IAS dream job. Anyways, awesome content. Loved it.
| 6
|
Liitle action and boring scenario. Good actors in a poor scenario
| 5
|
EPIC fantasy I don't care for anime(gasp) mainly because every 5 min or so you're watching a still for 30 seconds and the voice overs sounds like novices are doing it.Avatar however is one of the finest examples of the genre.I know it's an American cartoon but look at the credits almost all of the animators are from Japan. Aang is the Avatar a powerful being with the ability to control all of the elements. Earth, air, water, and fire who has been trapped in a block of ice for a century. In that time the Fire Nation has been waging a relentless war against the other nations in a bid to control the world.Aang and his friends Kitara,Sokka,Toph,Momo and Apa must stop the Fire Lord from this conquest,but first Aang must master the other 3 elements before he can challenge the Fire Lord.What follows is 3 seasons of great storytelling,great action,comedy,drama and animation which just gets better as the series progresses. There is a little something for everyone in this. A cartoon with depth and intelligence you must see it.
| 9
|
There is a movies based on science theories and facts , and movies like this one is based on potatos facts
| 3
|
A whole film based on Bangladesh and yet not even a single character was talking Bangla properly. Police car,Elite force, choppers and their uniforms nothing looks the same as they are in Bangladesh.Clearly they did no research about a country before making a whole film about it. Even The story was unrealistic as well. Only good thing about the movie is It's action scenes. Chris Hemsworth was superb as always
| 3
|
Where to start, poor post apocalyptic creativity, retake on the happening that didn't need to happen and if you wanna watch something like this with a bit of depth character development and good all round post apocalyptic action then watch ' the walking dead' ...
| 3
|
This is a movie based on a book about a series of crimes for which the perpetrator was never brought to justice. A cartoonist on a regional newspaper becomes obsessed with the case, to the detriment of aspects of his domestic life. Nothing is resolved. No easy answers.
This is an interesting attempt by Fincher and his team to do something a little different in terms of mainstream thriller fare. And, episode by episode, the story is well-told and superbly acted - some of the very best of Hollywood's character actors are on hand, led by the perpetually excellent Jake Gyllenhaal.
The trouble is, if nothing is resolved for the story's characters, then nothing is going to be resolved for the audience. Whether you think it's a good thing to be left with the same feeling of frustration as the protagonists will determine your enjoyment.
Personally, I'm not sympathetic to works of art that point out, however tactfully, that they are fiction while at the same time doing everything possible to present "real life" on screen - no one in ZODIAC looks at the camera and says "Hey you out there, it's only a movie!" I only wish they had. It might have lifted the air of portentousness that hovers over too much of this project.
| 5
|
Despite the enormous financial success of the eight-part Harry Potter series, adapted from J.K. Rowling's equally successful books, they never seemed to reach the heights of greatness that their box- office receipts would suggest. The main problem the few directors chosen to adapt the novels faced was having to condense the increasingly bulky word count into a coherent 2 hour plus movie. They were never anything less than fun and enchanting, but the films suffered from cramming in too many plot-lines and character backgrounds, and often felt like they were frantically lunging from one scene to the next. With Potter's time at Hogwarts now over, many wondered where Rowling would go next, and if she would even return to world of wizards, witches and house-elves at all.
To the fan's delight, she chose to keep her first screenplay within the same universe as Hagrid and Voldemort, but instead focus on a character frequently mentioned in the books as an author and good friend to headmaster Dumbledore. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was the name of the textbook Harry, Hermione and Ron would often brood over, and Newt Scamander the man behind it. The development of this revered encyclopaedia of the many weird and wonderful creatures unknown to mere muggles is the focus of Rowling's first movie attempt, and the action jumps back in time to 1920s New York to find the young Newt - played with a delightful hunched eccentricity by Eddie Redmayne - discovering a world completely different the one in his native Britain.
He is in the U.S. to raise awareness of the need to protect the beloved creatures of the world, and comes with a magical bag stuffed with the oddities. But much like the dangerous world Harry Potter grew up in 70-odd years later, the wizarding community live in fear of an evil wizard named Gellert Grindelwald (I won't spoil who plays him), who has recently murdered several aurors all over Europe. However, Newt has more pressing issues when some of his fantastic beasts escape, and his suitcase accidentally ends up in the hands of bumbling wannabe-baker and muggle ('no-maj' in American) Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler). Teaming up with recently-demoted auror Tina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston), Newt must round up the creatures wreaking havoc while convincing the Magical Congress that his pets aren't to blame for several unexplained deaths happening across the city.
There's certainly a lot going on in this movie, and early on it feels like Rowling is asking a hell of a lot of the audience in taking in this new ensemble of new characters and a whole new kind of wizarding world (wizard-muggle relationships are strictly banned here). Yet the story quickly falls into place, and Rowling delights in creating a wonderful array of genuinely fantastic beasts, each with their own unique look, quirks and special abilities. With a hushed voice and gently inquisitive personality, Newt instantly brings to mind Sir David Attenborough, one of the greatest human beings on this planet. His briefcase is like a tardis, containing an entire zoo of exotic creatures, each with their own habitat to suit their needs. When Newt takes the awestruck Jacob for a grand tour, it's almost like watching an episode of Planet Earth, and this use of commentary on the state of species' endangerment in the real world adds a bit of depth to the story.
Although Alfonso Cuaron certainly made the best entry into the Potter film franchise, David Yates has been the steady hand to guide the series since number 5, so it's of no surprise that he was chosen to take the reins again. Like before, he brings a flair to the magical moments, and the special effects constantly impress (while they may not be up to the recent Jungle Book's standards). Yet the best scenes are during the quieter moments, and in particular a scene at dinner involving a dazed Jacob and Tina's sexy sister Queenie (Alison Sudol), and their charming flirtations. Newt's friendship with Jacob forms the emotional backbone of the story, and Fogler damn near steals the entire film. There's also fine support from Colin Farrell as a shady Congress official, and Samantha Morton and Ezra Miller as a fanatical mother and son rallying no-majs against wizards. While the climax may descend slightly into fight- the-CGI-fart-cloud nonsense, it just feels good to be back in Rowling's world again.
| 7
|
I didn't finish this. I don't understand all the adulation. What a mess. I'll grant that sticking with it might have changed my mind but the odds were small.
| 3
|
Dom Cobb is a skilled thief, the absolute best in the dangerous art of extraction, stealing valuable secrets from deep within the subconscious during the dream state, when the mind is at its most vulnerable. Cobb's rare ability has made him a coveted player in this treacherous new world of corporate espionage, but it has also made him an international fugitive and cost him everything he has ever loved. Now Cobb is being offered a chance at redemption. One last job could give him his life back but only if he can accomplish the impossible-inception. Instead of the perfect heist, Cobb and his team of specialists have to pull off the reverse: their task is not to steal an idea but to plant one. If they succeed, it could be the perfect crime. But no amount of careful planning or expertise can prepare the team for the dangerous enemy that seems to predict their every move. An enemy that only Cobb could have seen coming. Now I just copied and pasted that i had no idea what was going on in this movie. The film is very good looking. The reason I said a let down is because i was expecting more since Christopher Nolan made The Dark Knight and Batman Begins which are two of my favorite movies ever. There is nothing that ever made me scared to go to sleep or anything. It's still one of the best movies of the year though because let's face it there hasn't been a lot of good movies out this year that are amazing like last year,like Avatar, Zombie Land, District 9, Up, and The Hurt Locker.The battle scenes were very impressive, academy award winning acting, but nothing really clicked so i am giving this an 8.5 and it's still worth your money but it's not an astounding master piece like people say it is.
| 7
|
If you love fast paced action, where the hero recovers from numerous crippling assaults and stabbings, (that would kill any bad guy) faster than you can say Jack be Nimble... this is the movies for you. Story line is very very simple, acting mediocre, but fully action paced to the hilt. Our hero, kills at least 84 bad guys, including the 'Big Boss' and effectively takes out the whole Russian Mafia: All because the Big Boss' son kills his dog and steals his car. Our hero makes Superman, Batman and Spider-Man look like kindergarten babes as he wisks through more than 80 thugs and trained killers and underworld henchmen like a 300km/hr tornado. The movie starts off with our hero collapsing (you think he dies) due to a mortal stomach wound, then it flashes back to fill in the intervening events, and ends with our hero rising like a Phoenix out of the ashes, as good as new (almost) for what could only be a the first step towards a future sequel. After beating and killing over 80 trained and ruthless mobsters, our hero is given a very good hiding by a female assassin, just hours after he was patched up from a previous almost fatal beating and stabbing. and a day or two later, the only way he can disarm and beat a much older (and nowhere near as fit or capable as our hero) Crime Boss is to let the crime boss stab him in the pre-existing stomach wound so he could take the knife off him and stab/kill him; perhaps this is where our hero's batteries were running low.Though not all is far fetched fantasy because this is one of a very few movies where the hero's gun runs out of bullets as any normal gun would, and we do see him reloading a few times. Apart from the miraculous recoveries (more than once) of our hero, the movie does have some somber or comical scenes to break up the voluminous killings, like when our hero goes to a classy hotel (akin to a sanctuary or demilitarized zone, where only assassins, hit men and criminals are allowed entry, to gather, stay and unwind or just take a breather from their hectic routine), with very stringent rules where any transgression carries an immediate death sentence: as ones greedy guest discovers. And for the car enthusiasts, our hero does do some very impressive driving/pursuit scenes. Pity because with a bit of toning down on the outlandish stunts and super recovery from serious injuries, this could have been a much better film.
| 4
|
The cinematography was good, however I thought it was just way too corny for the most part, and the acting was rather lame. Also historically inaccurate in regard to the First World war.
| 3
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.